On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 05:24:09PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 10:39:40AM -0500, Chris Morgan wrote: > > From: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Document the Anbernic RG351V panel, which appears to be identical to > > the panel used in their 353 series except for in inclusion of an > > additional DSI format flag. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Morgan <macromorgan@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > .../display/panel/newvision,nv3051d.yaml | 18 ++++++++++-------- > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/newvision,nv3051d.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/newvision,nv3051d.yaml > > index 116c1b6030a2..576f3640cb33 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/newvision,nv3051d.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/newvision,nv3051d.yaml > > @@ -7,9 +7,7 @@ $schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > > title: NewVision NV3051D based LCD panel > > > > description: | > > - The NewVision NV3051D is a driver chip used to drive DSI panels. For now, > > - this driver only supports the 640x480 panels found in the Anbernic RG353 > > - based devices. > > + The NewVision NV3051D is a driver chip used to drive DSI panels. > > > > maintainers: > > - Chris Morgan <macromorgan@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > @@ -19,11 +17,15 @@ allOf: > > > > properties: > > compatible: > > - items: > > - - enum: > > - - anbernic,rg353p-panel > > - - anbernic,rg353v-panel > > - - const: newvision,nv3051d > > + oneOf: > > + - items: > > + - enum: > > + - anbernic,rg353p-panel > > + - anbernic,rg353v-panel > > + - const: newvision,nv3051d > > + > > + - items: > > + - const: anbernic,rg351v-panel > > I don't understand. Is this panel not based on newvision,nv3051d? If > not, then it probably should be a different binding. Lot's of panel > bindings have similar properties. It appears to be the same panel (or extremely similar, honestly I don't know because there are no external markings on it). However, this specific implementation seems to require MIPI_DSI_CLOCK_NON_CONTINUOUS, not using it prevents the panel from working. As for the existing panel MIPI_DSI_CLOCK_NON_CONTINUOUS stops it from working. The different binding essentially determines whether or not that flag is present, but otherwise everything else is identical. Chris > > Rob
